Migrate Guest

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description adds that it requires elevated permissions, but does not disclose other important behaviors like potential downtime, irreversible effects, or need for shared storage. For a destructive operation, more transparency is expected.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the main action and includes a key qualifier (elevated permissions). It is minimal but not vague.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a migration tool with 9 parameters, the description is rather sparse. It does not discuss prerequisites (e.g., storage must be available on target), or what happens to local disks. With high schema coverage and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves room for improvement.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 89%, so most parameters are described. The description adds little beyond the schema except that it handles both VM and LXC and needs elevated permissions. It does not explain nuances like the difference between 'with-local-disks' and 'with-local-storage' or how 'online' affects behavior.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it migrates a VM or LXC container to another node, with the type parameter explicitly given. It is distinct from sibling tools like proxmox_guest_clone or proxmox_guest_disk_move.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It implies use when migrating a guest, and notes elevated permissions required, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives. The sibling list is large but no alternatives are named.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.